From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-08-07 22:11:53
Sascha Krissler <boost-dev_at_[hidden]> writes:
> That's what i am doing right now.
> The messy interface differences could be smoothed out by optional<>.
It's not optional's job to make that decision. 0 is a valid pointer
value, and it's not the same thing as "no pointer value."
> If i had to implement all the interface of OptionalPointee again
> that would be a lot of duplication whether changing optional would
> be a couple of mpl::if_. Well i will not wait for a new release of
> boost to solve my poblem anyway it is a suggestion to improve the
> genericity of the lib.
Unfortunately, it would reduce genericity. Suddenly some types have
special values that can't be represented distinctly from an empty
-- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk